Quote from: n0nce on January 05, 2022, 11:29:50 PM

that's the entire idea: fast, cheap Bitcoin payments with the security of normal Bitcoin transactions at almost no cost.

dont exaggerate LN promises as having same security as confirmed bitcoin
be more honest about what makes LN different. then you might atleast make people aware of funding loss risk and issues they need to be aware of when using LN while also advertising the differences as a niche service LN could offer.
honesty is best policy, not the hyped up utopian story

Quote from: n0nce on January 05, 2022, 11:29:50 PM

In theory, in the future if you route thousands or millions of these a day, even tiny fees could sum up to amounts that can cover the energy requirement for running that node.

there is no massive expense in energy cost running an LN node. LN doesnt do mining.
and it doesnt need thousands or millions to cover energy requirement.

a laptop usually uses 2.4kwh if online for 24 hours. which is at 13pence/cents per kw =31pence/cents a day
if a fee was just 1 sat per payment hop. 100 payments =5cents so 620 payments of 1sat is break even

the actual expense and the pain in peoples necks is the bitcoin confirmation fee of locking/unlocking funds

so instead of emphasising the 31cent 'energy cost' mention the $3 confirmation lock cost to peg into ln and the $3 cost to unpeg out of LN ($6 to use LN before even doing any 'payments')